tv Port Commission 41216 SFGTV April 15, 2016 9:00am-11:46am PDT
>> all those in favour? yie company. >> pledge o pledge of allegiance. [recitation of the plenl of allegiance] >> >> please be advised the ringing of an use of cell phones and pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices is prohibited of he's items. anyone will be removed if using an electronic device. a member of the public has up to three minutes to make personal public comments on the agenda items item 8, public comments on items not listed on the agenda. >> is there any public comment
on anything not listed? that being said, public comment is closed. next item. >> item 9-a executive report. >> elaine forbes interim port director. i'd leak to report on the happy item about the opening of crab season. it was near the end of crab season when the ban on fishing was lifted march 26th by the department of fish and wildlife. the commercial crabbing season typically opens in mid-november. however this year a warm ocean temperatures caused an algae bloom that made the crab unsafe to consume. to celebrate the late opening of crab season, the pacific coast federation of fisher map's association hosted a media event april first in front of fisherman's and seaman's membe
morreale chapel. mike mcguire and aquaculture, our mayor, edwin lee, a champion of san francisco's fishing p community and lori french a member of the multigeneration of fishing family all mailed remarks. president adams and i were in attendance. on february 9th, 2016 this commission approved the crab industry relief plan which waived port of san francisco fees on boating and crab receiver lease rent and storage fees. the last day to apply was last month monday. they received 9 crab processors and receivers. we had previously p estimated that the total relief would come to $128,000. the actual cost was higher
$216,000. this relief program was very, very critical to the industry. it's been a vital life line. it's been a terrible season and even with delayed opening. the impact is felt by our local fishing community. we'd like to thank the mayor and port industry for approving the relief plan. it's been an important piece and a thanks to commissioner adams for making a tour of the facilities and meeting with mr. colins president of the san francisco crab association and for staff for implementing this important plan. the second item is earth day april 23rd is upon us. we'll be hosting several events in the southern waterfront to celebrate. friday april 22nd from 2:00 to 5:00 miss kapperneli will host
alter eego foods finance ar earth day event. they'll have a group of 30 volunteers to perform litter pickup and weeding and gardening. there is a donation of a truck load of dirt to be delivered and materials and supply and tools will be provided to make this a successful time for all who attend. on saturday, april 23rd there will be a coastal cleanup from 9:00 to 12:00 p.m. the cleanup locations include ismuss creek and [inaudible] rsvp. in the afternoon there will be an event from 12:00 to 2:00 al eco center hosted by bay.org and the rec and park department. this will include a climbing wall, bikes, skate ramps and
kayaks located at 232 [inaudible] street. we encourage the families to consider attending this event which would would be an excellent way to celebrate the earth and eco birthday. >> is there any public comment on the report? be it none, public comment is close. >> item 9-b port commissioner report. >> fellow commissioners. >> nothing to report. >> i have nothing to report. i'll save mine for the last item. 12-b. >> oo item 10-a requestings modification for 2161 by increasing the contract duration. 10-b requests modification of
2758 by increases the contract duration and item 10-c for organization to ward 2776 contract five year maintenance project in the amount of 25,000,087 a thousand and authorization for contingency fund of 10% of the contract amount for $2,267,500 for unanticipated contingencies for a total authorization not to exceed $28,462,500. can commissioners for item 10-c, there are two typos in the resolution. dollar amount on the first and second should be $25,875,000. >> so moved. >> second. >> okay. i have one card and public comment. veronica sanchez to speak on 10-c. >> good afternoon. mr. chairman. members of the commission
veronica sanchez on behalf of the master maids and pilots. our members crew, the tugs on the used for the dredging operations. we're very delighted to hear that one of our union employers west star marine is a sub contractor on this contract. we're pleased that they -- the prime contractors has selected them. west star marine is it a woman-owned business, a tenant of the port of san francisco for 30 years at peer 50. my reason for coming here today is not only to let you know that your own tenant is going to be a beneficiary of the contract but to thank the port's fishery department and acknowledge their efforts to respond to a concern that our union brought to their attention lastier.
our members were concerned about the payment of prevailing wage. and some allegations that there were out of state contractors coming in tugboat -- tugboat was coming in from out of the state being paid below the prevailing wage. your staff responded very diligently and the rfp has clear language on it. so we think that any voids or misunderstandings are clear. i hope that as this contract goes forward in the next five years, the payment of the prevailing swaij certainly a high priority for the port engineering department and the enforcement arm of the city who receive the payrolls from the contractor. so thank you again to port engineer ugin kim and kent iew in obtaining this language and
clarification for this contract. we look forward to benefiting from this drudging contract, our members do. >> thank you, is there any more public comment on 10-a, bo c, public comment is closed. commissioners on resolution 16, 13, 14, 1 15 all in favor say aye that passes unanimous. next item. >> 11-a under results of the earthquake vulnerability study of the northern seawall.
>> good afternoon. commissioners. president adams. interim executive director forbes and members of the public and port staff i'm stephen [inaudible] and a civil engineer. today i will provide an update and results of the earthquake vulnerability study report of the great sea ball wall. first, seawall is not about it fall into the by. in a major earthquake, the big one, is highly unlikely to cause any breech of the seawall that will dramatically flood downtown. apologies to the rock and new line cinema. what you'll hear today and the message i want you to take away can the great seawall which forms a foundation of our
beautiful and historic northern waterfront is seismically vulnerable. the next earthquake will cause damage and destruction as it slides towards the bay and there are measures we can take to improve the poarmperform ants and reduce the recovery time and lessen the human suffering of our city. none of it is inexpensive. after my presentation, patrick godlini is here, the city's chief resiliency officer will give an update on the fourth sea plan in which the seawall is an integral part. on with the show. great seawall stretches from fisherman's wharf to mission creek. here you can see the original 1850s shoreline and study boundary which is similar.
p. >> i'm compelled to recognize the leadership in understanding the importance of the seawall. the study the sea wall and approve funding for this earthquake study. somi thought the summary was appropriate. the study is led between a joint venture between ght with a long history in the bay area and gtc geotechnical engineering firm with a strong affinity for young bay mud and old bay clay as well. with us today a craig lewis. if you can stand up, please. craig lewis is a structural engineer from ght. and darrin van huff geotechnical
engineer from gtc. they've been integral parts of the study leading the study. because of the significance of the study and the complexity of the engineering, staff elected to hire a separate engineering team to perform a detailed peer review. callie is a lieding firm with projects throughout the world including the seattle sea wall replacement and lange and treadmill and are roto have been providing leading geotechnical engineering to are san francisco since before the start of my career. the study establishing a zone of influence. develops maps. review asteroseismology science and develop hazards and ground-shaking trends. anize the seawall for stability and potential lateral spreading and settlement. calibrate the wrults the 1906
and 1989 observations. structural analysis of select bulk head wall and wharves which is in progress. map utilities and assess impacts which is in progress. assess post earthquake flood hazards. breach. high level impact analysis. ret owe fit items and ranking and prioritizing which are very much the next steps. a bit of history. the great seawall was planned in 1870. constructed in 1879 through 1916. approximately 37 years. i little over three miles long located hundreds of feet baywa bayward along the sea line. it's complex, historic resource is the foundation of the northern waterfront. there are 22 original sections.
over 5 a combinations of bulk heads and wharves and modified and repaired through the the 100 years. this is from the port's engineering archive. this is an original plan for section 89-a and here you can see the general components. very large rock dike which is 30 to 40 feet tall. a bulk head wall which sits upon it which varies in height from 5 to 15 feet. and a bulk head wharf which is connected to the bulk head wall. these are all the components of the seawall. it was constructed out in the bay. here is proof. out in the bay. construction was a major effort at the time. using technology of the day and employing thousands of people. this is looking at the bay over
the embarcadero canal which didn't last long. this is filled in to become the embarcadero. this is the not the bay. the bay is on other side of the concrete wall. so, when we talk about the seawall, even though it does vary, there is a typical section. this is depicting the typical section. seawall is the rock dike. bulk head wall and bulk head wharf. bulk head sits upon the wharf. roadway. light rail are all protected by the seawall. one of the meaj tasks of the standardy steam was to compile the significantment of geotechnical situation. moorings, reportsened maps and enter it into the sen ral tral database and compile maps.
the maps focus on three main soil of interest. thickness of artificial fill which is shown here. all the dots are geotechnical moorings. victhickness of young bay mud and depths of the bed are rock, all variables are key to understanding the performance of the seawall and vary considerably over the three miles. armed with the mapping and records of the seawall construction, the team chose eight representative sections for detailed analysis. the purpose was bind the conditions to extrapolate results. this is near peer 29. there is bay mud under the rock wall. various layers of soil underneath. this is the section near peer 3. thicker bay mud.
and this is the section near peer 38 which shows very little bay mud under the seawall. but a sand layer which is potentially liquefyable. the next step was for the team to look at the latest earthquake hazard data. so we are -- we have the benefit of living in earthquake country. i suppose. that is the united states geological survey, united states geological society seismologists want to be here. they study the area and the fault data is as good as it gets. bad news is, it's not very good even in this day. even so, they triened predict earthquakes. in 2014, the u.s.g.s. are preticketing a 72% of
probability of one or more major earthquakes magnitude 6.7 or higher occurring in the bay area over the next 30 years. if that is located near san francisco, it will likely damage the seawall. just to remind us, 1906 earthquake versus the 1989 earth earthquake. this is the only known seismograph of recording the 1906 erlt qab quake and the 6.9 of 1989. it is from germany. you can see the difference in energy. the bottom is 1906. the 1906 released about 60 times the energy of the other earthquake and damage to san francisco was eye opening, but it would have been worse if the epicenter were not 60 miles away.
the too many took all the latest data and developed -- this graph shows the severity of ground shaking on the vertical access versus the horizontal access. it generated these curves. of note is that there is little difference between the 100 year and 500 year ground-shaking levels. with the seismic models, the team turns its attention to the availability of the seawall. various methods were used to analyze the variability of the seawall. this shows the shifting under the mud under the seawall. what does it all mean? there is liquefyable fill behind the seawall.
there is soft mud and rock -- soft mud under the rock seawall and the combination of those two causes the move towards the bay and settle and strong ground shaking. damage to historic bulk head wafers and buildings supported on piles over the sea swawl exacerbated by seawall movement. compromised access piers and ferries is likely. cracking of the embarcadero and promenade as a result of seawall movement and even a distortion of the light rail tracks are possible. and disruption to the city and the port are asker an askers ander baiteare exacerbated by movement of the seawall. these show the lateral spreading of the seawall and land with the
repeat of the 1906 earthquake. 20 to 60-inches is predicted near peer 27 and 29. 10 do 20-inch as long most other areas north of the ferry building. and 5 to 20-inches south of the ferry building. there is a hotspot near the giant ballpark which is due to sand fill which showed up in a few of the borings but this would need further investigation to determine the results. team also mapped utilities. we took the utility mapping along with the ground displacements to our utility partners and they provide us with an assessment of the system and weigh hope to work that into the final report. the primary impacts. safety is a concern. bulk head wharves, buildings and the promenade sections over the
bulk heads. many of these structures predate earthquake models. they're strong but have little reserve capacity. seawall movement compounds the problem of earthquake ground shaking for the structures. seawall movement tends to impact the underground. if qeek see the damage we can retrofit the are instruction. tourism -- latest statistics are 18 million visitors a year. $11billion in spending and $3 billion in payroll. at the port itself, there are $2.1 billion a year in exk activiteconomic activity along the front in terms of rent cmentd business income and wainls. transportation is a concern concerned. ferry. muni and corridor, a life line for the city are at risk.
maritime ferry and cruise industry is here. bar pilots and water taxis all call the northern waterfront their home. emergency response, the waterfront will play a large roll in disaster response. the ferry system will be needed to supplement regional transit. movement of people and supplies will take place here. finally, utility services breaks to the utility line in the embarcadero will disrupt not only the port ff the system to serve the city. better study is needed to understand the independencies. in terms of damage, there is at least $1.6 billion in port paths that are protected by the seawall in this zone. what can we do to improve the seawall performance? study team took a broad brush look at options to improve
performance including lick r include liquefaction. ground improvement land side of the bulk heads, seawall replacement or buttressing from the bay side and utility relocation or replacement. this map shows the vulnerabilities here. you can see the seawall moving towards the bay and the lateral spreading takes place in this zone. the option one lick which fax or remediation there are grouting, mixing and exa compaction. they lower permanent ground police displacement, they're not fully effective in stopping
seawall lateral movement. they do reduce muni and earthquake damage somewhat. these improvements do not provide a stable base for sea level rise adaptation and there is incredible disruption of the embarcadero for constructing this type of improvement. ground improvement under the seawall. improving the weak soils under the seawall is a no-brainer but it's not easy. it's expensive and disruptive. if you can improve the soil you can mitigate most of if not all the lateral spreading and provides a strong and stable foundation for raising the area in response to sea level rise. the most promising method is jet driving which uses high pressure nozzles to cut through the weak soils mixed with cement and
create soil cement columns in place. the pier is possible to use inclined drilling to get through most of the rock dike without impacting the historic bulk heads but not without disrupting the be embarcadero northbound lanes and promenade. so the trick here is being able to get through the rock to strengthen the soils underneath. any type of drilling of large diameter will not get through the rock dike and tend to destroy it. these techniques with small diameter drilling are highly feasible. i wanted to mention that stabilizing the seawall stops lateral spreading, it does not complete the picture for earthquake safety and performance bulingsd and wharves. bulk head wharves and bullings
will experience strong ground shaking. they can be retrofit it perform better with retro fits. the piles can be wrapped. the connections can be strengthened. these are things that are fairly normal and easy to do. if if they perform great, once you seawall movement, seawall movement, these retro fits generally do not protect the piles underground. option three is we looked at jet grouting, land side of the -- i should say ground improvement land side of the see wall. improving the ground from the grounds from bulk head building. stay away from the bulk head buildings and stay away from the water. jet imrowting and deep soil mixing can be use. deep soil mixing is a technique
where large paddles are driven into the ground and the soil mixes with cement to create strong oil columns. it's a less expensive technique than jet grouting and highly disruptive. we don't think it's possible where we have the rock dike but it's possible further out within the embarcadero. this does provide a stable base for sea level rise adaptation. once again, retro fits of the bulk head wharf would be required to complete the resiliency picture. option four, we said let's look bayward. what can we do to stay out of the embarcadero promenade to stay out of that highly active zone. can we move toward towards the bay and buttress the seawall that way. this creates a new seawall and
does so by driving sheet piles. outboard and inboard to create a cell. filling the cell with soil which could be done from the bay side hydraulic fill. and then p improving that soil mass using deep soil mixing techniques. then finally, filling behind with a lightweight pumpable fill. in that way, we think the bulk head building and wharf could stay in place. where there is a pier, we'd are have to remove a section of the pier. both the shed and the pier structure, the shed section could be replaced. there are many locations along the waterfront where there is it not a pier in the way or wharf head and building. this has application there as well. the big idea is that all this
construction could take place from the water without disrupting life on the embar em -- embarcadero. obviously there are permitting and environmental concerns that need to be fully vepted with this type of idea but it's viable from a technical point of view and cost competitive. i want to spend a few minutes to talk about our flood risk which has to be factored into the picture. so right now along the embarcadero, we've seen this year king tides and areas where there is nuisance flooding south of the ferry building. this slide shows the 100 year storm with six inches of sea level rise. if p floods all of the the he can bark droa given the projections of sea level rise. 6 inches could be here in by
2017 or as late as 2032. if we have another 6-inches or 12 inches, we see that the hundred year flood gets to the muni underground stations and fluids most of the embarcadero up market street. this could be here in 2030 under high sea level rise scenarios or 2050 under a likely sea level scenario. the high end scenario is 66 inches by 2100. the preliminary conclusions and needs, 2 billion to $3 billion would be needed overall to fully stabilize three miles of seawall. up to $5 billion is the price
tag if we look at sea level rise and we build up for sea level rise. that's a huge number. what we think the next steps we should take an initial focus on safety. critical facilities. requires significant outreach and further study potentially pilot projects. mainly focused on improving the earthquake safety particularly to non-ductile concrete bulk head wharves. reduce earthquake damage and disruption for essential facilities and life lines. and flood protection and improvements south of the ferry building to pier 22.5. this is the stwroan that flood the he can bark droa and poses a risk to muni. there is a san francisco
resiliency strategy that which as a goal of an earthquake front 2040. next steps. coming months. outreach and comments from port tenants and partners. this summer will finalize the earthquake vulnerability study. and provide a status report to the port commission late summer. 2016 and 2017 coordinate with the city life line's council. resiliency plan and mayor sea level rise action plan. includes the port's waterfront, land use plan update, so we'll actually be presenting to the land use update tomorrow night the results of the study. we are asking for $10 million in additional funding for the
seawall resiliency program. we're asking for the city to fund 8 million the port $2 million. this request is currently in. we continue to seek assistance from the united states army corps of engineers who are primarily concerned with flood protection and they are completing a study for us right now for federal interest determination and it looks like we may have a favorable result. and then we are participating in the living city's infrastructure financing cohort which was the competition that we were on recently with the seawall project. 18 months financing infrastructure financing cohort with three other cities can. director forbes will be participating in that. i think you're leaving tomorrow for that kickoff.